Pages

Translate

Monday, December 10, 2012

The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has recently
obtained the summary of a new Chinese study linking fluoride exposure to
reduced intelligence in
children. Incredibly, this is the36th
study to find an association between
fluoride and reduced intelligence.

Although FAN has yet to translate the full
study, a translation of the abstract reveals that the scientists not only
examined the neurological impact of fluoride in water, but also the neurological
impact of the total fluoride dose from all sources. According to the summary,
the children in the high-fluoride community (0.57 to 4.5 ppm) had an average of
8 less IQ points than children from the lower fluoride community (0.18 to 0.76
ppm). When the authors controlled for other sources of fluoride in the
children's diets, they found a significant "dose response" trend, meaning that
children with higher total daily intakes of fluoride tended to have lower IQs
than children with low fluoride intakes. The total daily doses ranged from 1 mg/day to 4+
mg/day -- a dose range that overlaps the doses that millions of American
children now regularly receive.

FAN obtained this study as part of its
ongoing translation project which monitors, accesses, and translates critical
studies from China and Russia that would otherwise never see the light of day in
the U.S. As attorney Michael Connett explains below, FAN's translation project has
already had a significant impact on the scientific debate, and we expect this
impact will continue to increase in the months
ahead.

FAN's Translation
Project

By Michael
Connett, JD

If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around,
does it make a sound? A similar question could once be asked about Chinese
research on fluoride toxicity: For decades, Chinese scientists published studies
on how fluoride impacts human health that -- because they were written in
Chinese and published in Chinese journals -- were completely unknown and ignored
by scientists in the U.S. and other fluoridating countries. In recent years,
however, FAN has taken unprecedented
steps to change this situation -- and in the
process, has helped to change the scientific and public debate on water
fluoridation. As someone who has been at the forefront of this effort, let me
take a second to explain some of the
background.

In 2007, I conducted a
comprehensive
search of several online Chinese databases to
find studies investigating fluoride's effect on the brain. Up until that time,
it was believed that only about 5 studies had ever investigated fluoride's
impact on IQ. It became apparent to me upon searching through the databases,
however, that many other IQ studies had been conducted that had never before
been cited in the western
literature.

At FAN, we take our job of broadening public awareness about
fluoride seriously. Believing that knowledge of these studies would draw much
needed attention to fluoride's adverse effects on the brain, FAN accessed,
translated, and published ten IQ studies in the 2008 volume of the journal
Fluoride. Although these studies had been published in China as far back
as 1989, they had almost entirely escaped the attention of western scientists.
Thanks to FAN's research, however, they had become available for all to
see.

One of FAN's guiding principles is that better
information produces better results; that the more the public knows about
fluoride, the wiser they will be in handling it in a safe and sensible manner.
We were very gratified, therefore, when a team of
Harvard
scientists -- in a highly
publicized review on fluoride and IQ earlier this year -- cited almost all of
FAN's IQ translations, and provided 8 links to the FAN webpage. When Harvard
scientists

publish a study in a leading environmental health
journal (Environmental Health Perspectives) and cite your organization's
research no less than 8 times, you know you're doing something
right!

The 2012
Translations

In the spring of this year, I decided to do
another comprehensive review of the Chinese databases to see if I could
find any additional studies on fluoride and IQ, as well as other effects. As
with the previous effort, it didn't take long to realize that there was still a
vast amount of research on fluoride's toxicity that had still not seen the light
of day in the western world. So, once again FAN began accessing and translating
these studies. In total, FAN accessed and translated eleven previously unknown
studies on IQ, ten of which reported a reduction in IQ from fluoride exposure.
All of these studies are now publicly
available on the FAN
website for all to see.

Thursday, August 02, 2012

"There has been no research to show
using bottled water causes tooth decay," reports American Dental
Association spokesman Dr. Johnathan Shenkin in a Healthday.com article.

Dr. Burton Edelstein agrees. He is president
of the DC-based Children's Dental Health Project and ColumbiaUniversity dentistry professor who describes the increasing prevalence of tooth
decay among young children as "alarming."

"[Today] one in 10 2-year olds, one in
five 3-year olds, one in three 4-year olds and approaching half of 5-year-olds
have visually evident tooth decay experience," he said, adding that
"the consequences in terms of pain, infection, dysfunction and unmet
treatment need are significant.” Edelstein told Healthday.com

No US child is fluoride-deficient. But up to 60% show
signs of fluoride-overdose (dental fluorosis), Tooth decay rates are soaring
despite 67 years of fluoridation, 57 years of fluoridated toothpaste, a glut of
fluoridated dental products, and a fluoride-saturated food supply.

The U.S. Surgeon General reports that
excessive fluoride increases susceptibility to cavities.

To avoid crippling skeletal fluorosis, the
Environmental Protection Agency sets 4 parts per million (ppm) or 4 milligrams per
quart of water as a “safe” water level.. Many Americans exceed that amount from all sources.

The USDA provides a database of fluoride contents of food
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/Fluoride.html

Reports that bottled-water drinkers risk more cavities are
unsubstantiated. The Wall Street Journal reported, "Little research has
been
done on the use of bottled water and risk of tooth decay, dental experts
concede.

"For children's dental health measures,
it was found that fluoridation rates were not significantly related to the
measures of either caries or overall condition of the teeth for urban or rural
areas." (West VirginiaUniversity Rural HealthResearchCenter, 2012)

"It may...be that fluoridation of
drinking water does not have a strong protective effect against early childhood
caries (cavities)," reports dentist Howard Pollick, University of
California, and colleagues, in the Winter 2003 Journal of Public Health
Dentistry.

Even when fluoridated water is the most
consumed item, cavities are extensive when diets are poor, according to Caries
Research.

Burt and colleagues studied low-income African-American adults, 14-years-old
and over, living in Detroit, Michigan, where water suppliers add fluoride chemicals
attempting to prevent cavities. Yet, 83%of this population has severe tooth
decay and diets high in sugars and fats, and low in fruits and vegetables.

"The most frequently reported food on a daily basis was [fluoridated] tap
water," write Burt's research team. Second were [probably fluoridated] soft
drinks and third were potato chips.

Tooth decay in fluoridated Detroit's
toddlers' teeth is also shocking. Almost all of Detroit's five-year-olds have cavities; most of them go
unfilled.

The scientific literature now tells us that
ingesting fluoride does not reduce tooth decay so it’s no surprise that
drinking fluoride-free bottled water is not linked to higher rates of tooth
decay and that people who drink fluoridated tap water are not experiencing less
tooth decay.

Monday, July 09, 2012

A wee bit of fluoride makes teeth and dentists happy, we’re told. Dr. Happy Tooth’s smiley face turns into a frown when his favorite decay magic bullet is busted as a killer. Anything in large doses kills, bristles Drs. Drill, Fill & Bill, even Dihydrogen Monoxide, they often tease. Ha, ha, get it – water – H2O. Stop picking on fluoride, they say, you make us look bad, often invoking the movie “Dr. Strangelove.”

Few people know that fluoride maims and kills. Dentists wouldn’t want you worrying your little head off, and possibly scaring you away from twice-yearly insurance-paid-whether-you-need-it-or-not treatments and those horrible toxic doses (26,000 ppm) of fluoride varnish they paint on babies' teeth. Fluoride’s toxicity is downplayed-–or worse, never mentioned. That way everyone stays happy including organized dentistry’s biggest benefactors--toothpaste makers, and the media and legislators supported by the same benefactors.

The following are stories organized dentistry and fluoride profiteers fail to mention:

a) A two-year-old Australian boy died after swallowing too many fluoride tablets(4).

b) A three-year-old Austrian boy died from swallowing too many fluoride tablets (5).

c) Three-year-old American boy died from ingesting, instead of expectorating, his dentist’s fluoride treatment (6).

d) Three dialysis patients died from fluoride poisoning at the University of Chicago Hospital when equipment meant to filter out fluoride from the water supply malfunctioned (7).

e) Fluoride killed an Alaskan man and poisoned 296 others after too much fluoride accidentally flowed into the public water supply (8).

f) Fluoride killed a 65-year-old kidney dialysis patient who became ill during a blood cleaning process after water supply workers left a fluoride valve for too long to allow toxic fluoride levels to flow into the public water supply (9) in Annapolis, Maryland.

g) A 51-year-old committed suicide by fluoridated toothpaste, according to the American Association of Poison Control Centers (1). They won’t release the who, what, where, when and why to us.

h) 47 children were accidentally killed by a cook who mistakenly made their egg breakfast sodium fluoride powder instead of powdered milk (14)

A) A 52-year-old women with a two-gallon, double-strength daily instant tea habit developed bone and joint pain and other abnormalities indicative of chronic fluoride toxicity or skeletal fluorosis. After breaking the tea habit her pain and discomfort alleviated. Tea is naturally high in fluoride and few doctors are trained to diagnose fluoride’s adverse effects (2).

B) Daily high-dose fluoride home therapy caused gastric distress, difficulty in swallowing, leg muscle and knee joint soreness, and general malaise in a patient, according to the Journal of the American Dental Association (3).

Each year there are thousands of reports to
Poison Control centers in
the United States related to excessive ingestion of fluoride dental products
(toothpaste, mouth rinses, and supplements).
Animals aren’t immune. Elk drinking naturally high fluoridated water in Yellowstone Park die a decade sooner than they should (3a).

Many Americans fail to notice their fluoridated toothpaste carries this message: “WARNING: Keep out of the reach of children under 6 years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center right away.”

Dentists often downplay this warning protecting fluoride more than your children. But a leading toxicologist and fluoridation promoter, Gary Whitford, PhD, protected his own children from their toxic fluoride tubes by putting them out of their reach. See: http://fluoridedangers.blogspot.com/2014/08/keep-fluoride-toothpaste-out-of.html Did your dentist ever tell you that?

Fluoride caused many industrial, occupational and environmental sicknesses and deaths also (10).

Natural fluoride cripples and maims too many people in the world who live on high naturally-fluoridated water supplies such as in Nalgonda, India (11).

In the early clinical stage of skeletal fluorosis, symptoms include pains in the bones and joints; sensations of burning, pricking, and tingling in the limbs; muscle weakness; chronic fatigue; and gastrointestinal disorders and reduced appetite. During this phase, changes in the pelvis and spinal column can be detected on x-rays. The bone has both a more prominent and more blurred structure.

In the second clinical stage, pains in the bones become constant and some of the ligaments begin to calcify. Osteoporosis may occur in the long bones, and early symptoms of osteosclerosis (a condition in which the bones become more dense and have abnormal crystalline structure) are present. Bony spurs may also appear on the limb bones, especially around the knee, the elbow, and on the surface of tibia and ulna.

In advanced skeletal fluorosis, called crippling skeletal fluorosis, the extremities become weak and moving the joints is difficult. The vertebrae partially fuse together, crippling the patient.

Dr. A. K. Susheela, a leading fluoride expert, explains in a video why US physicians overlook fluoride as a possible cause of diseases commonly caused by fluoride. http://tinyurl.com/Susheela

References:(1) American Association of Poison Control
Centers, 2002 Annual Report, (Page 367)http://www.aapcc.org/archive/Annual%20Reports/02report/Annual%20Report%202002.pdf(2) J
Bone Miner Res. 2008 “Skeletal Fluorosis from
Instant Tea,” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18179362(3) Controlling the fluoride dosage in a
patient with compromised salivary function.Journal of the American Dental
Association. January 2005 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15693498 by Fred Eichmiller et al ( Eichmiller presented pro-fluoride
information at Alderman Bohl’s fluoridation hearing as an employee of Delta Dental who made
over $400,000 a year in 2010 )

Sunday, July 08, 2012

Sodium fluoride is added to many US water supplies, including Sacramento, California, in a failed effort to reduce tooth decay in Americans who cook with and drink tap water. Fluoride is not added to purify the water.

"Crystalline sodium fluoride is no longer produced in the USA and now is only available from import manufacturers in China, Japan, and Belgium. It should be noted that Center for Disease Control (CDC) made strong recommendations that only US product be used due to quality control and efficient operation of the saturator system," according to the Director, Department of Utilities, Sacramento, California.

"The Japan and China manufactured supplies have been found to be of a lower quality, causing costly equipment problems and failures. Shipments of sodium fluoride often have damaged bags that are leaking product through punctures or failed seals as well," he reports.

"The movement of suppliers away from domestically produced sodium fluoride is adversely affecting the fluoridation feed equipment of our 28 wells, primarily due to clogged fluoride injector pumps. Much of the loss of ground water well production is due to fluoride related issues," he continues.

"Fluoridation is a very costly and labor intensive process and requires constant monitoring of fluoride concentrations to ensure proper dosages. The chemical is very corrosive, so all equipment that is used in the fluoridation process has a very short life expectancy and needs to be replaced frequently.; The crystalline sodium fluoride that is used at the 28 well sites not only causes the need for frequent equipment replacement, but also causes frequent and complex system failures. Such system failures mean that, while wells are out of service and until the problem has been identified and resolved, the wells are not being used to deliver potable water to rate payers. Well shut downs also affect our ability to meet water pressure requirements which are mandated in Title 22," he continues.

Amesbury, Massachusetts, ended fluoridation when its Chinese fluoride clogged up the system with an unknown substance.

China has a history of
contaminating food items for profit. Why would we be buying China's
fertilizer waste, sodium fluoride, and expect it to be safe?

Saturday, May 19, 2012

As a child, there was
nothing I liked about going to the dental dispensary, with the possible
exception of the large tropical fish aquarium in the waiting room. This
was a distraction to what was coming: three hours in a vast hall
containing a double line of black dental chairs and a matching double
line of white-clad dental students. And that, as a six-year-old, is
where I first met fluoride on a regular basis. After a free cleaning and
checkup (the reason my cost-conscious parents had me go there, and the
reason it literally took three hours to complete), fluoride was applied
to my teeth with a swab. I remember both the smell (acrid) and the taste
(astringent). I actually looked forward to the fluoride treatment,
simply because it was the last thing they did to me before I was allowed
to leave. Did it work? Probably not. In addition to my regular topical
fluoride treatments, I lived in a city with fluoridated water and was
raised on fluoridated toothpaste. And I had a mouthful of amalgam by
high-school graduation.

Controversy? What Controversy?

In the late 1970s, as a young parent, I became aware of the National Fluoridation News,
published in the still largely unknown town of Gravette, Arkansas (pop
2,200). For a very small donation, I received a boxful of back issues by
return mail. In addition to this generosity, what surprised me about
the NFNews was the high caliber of its content. Most of the
non-editorial articles were well referenced and the work of well
qualified scientists. This was something of a poser, for as a college
biology major, I had been thoroughly schooled in the two Noble Truths of
Fluoridation: 1) that fluoride in drinking water would reduce tooth
decay by 60-65% and 2) that anyone who disagreed with this view was a
fool. Yes, I had seen the movie Dr. Strangelove, and yes, I knew how to read an ADA endorsement on a toothpaste label.

Not long after this, my penchant for reading toothpaste labels paid off. There it was, printed right on the back of the tube:

"Children should only use a 'pea-sized' portion of fluoride toothpaste when they brush."

I had two toddlers, and this caught my
interest. Looking into it, I learned that small children swallow a
considerable quantity of toothpaste when they brush, perhaps most of it.

Anyone who has watched television at all
could not have failed to see toothpaste ads. They always showed the
brush loaded, with decorative overhang tips flared out on each end. When
"AIM" brand toothpaste first came out, I distinctly remember toothpaste
being displayed in two or even three layers on the brush. The number of
children that used the product so generously, and swallowed half of it,
will likely remain unknown. As for me, I immediately switched my family
to toothpaste with no fluoride in it. As for toothpaste labels, they
rather quickly were re-written. They now read:

"If you accidentally swallow more
than used for brushing, seek professional help or contact a poison
control center immediately."

But all children swallow more than is used for brushing. The only question is, how much? The US Centers for Disease Control states:

"Fluoride toothpaste contributes to
the risk for enamel fluorosis because the swallowing reflex of children
aged less than 6 years is not always well controlled, particularly among
children aged less than 3 years. Children are also known to swallow
toothpaste deliberately when they like its taste. A child-sized
toothbrush covered with a full strip of toothpaste holds approximately
0.75-1.0 g of toothpaste, and each gram of fluoride toothpaste, as
formulated in the United States, contains approximately 1.0 mg of
fluoride. Children aged less than 6 years swallow a mean of 0.3 g
of toothpaste per brushing and can inadvertently swallow as much as 0.8
g." [1, emphasis added]

For children age 6 and under, that is an average
swallow of a third of the toothpaste they use, and a possibility of
inadvertently swallowing 80% or more. There is about a milligram of
fluoride in a single "serving" of toothpaste. I am calling it a
"serving" because fluoride in toothpaste is regulated as if it were a
food, not a drug. How is this true? Adding even less than one milligram
of fluoride to a single serving of children's vitamins instantly makes
them a prescription drug. It is truly odd that fluoride toothpaste
remains an over-the-counter product.

Into the Schools

When my children were in grade school,
the local dental college (the people who brought us the dispensary I
went to as a young boy) interested our school district in a research
project. Our town's public water was under local control and
unfluoridated, unlike the city nearby. So the idea was to administer
fluoride rinses to schoolchildren, during the school day, and then count
caries. We were asked to sign a permission letter, which emphasized
likely benefits and glossed over any hazards. Remembering what
youngsters did with sweet toothpaste, I made a guess that they'd swallow
a saccharin-laced rinse about as well. We chose to not sign. But I did
check the box to receive results of the study. It ultimately came in the
form of a letter, saying that the results were disappointingly
inconclusive: no evidence that fluoride rinses helped our
unfluoridated-water-drinking community. I am unaware that the study was
published.

That is not especially surprising.
Shutting out access to balanced scientific discussion of fluoridation is
alive and well. . . and taxpayer supported. Negative fluoride studies
and reviews are hardly abundant on PubMed/Medline. One does not need to
be a conspiracy theorist to observe that the US National Library of
Medicine refuses to index the journal Fluoride. [2] Censorship is conspicuously aberrant behavior for any public library.

No Discussion

About 15 years ago, our town's public
water supply was annexed by the nearby metropolis. Aside from a rate
increase, the only other, barely detectable change to our bill was a
one-time typed legend at the bottom of it that fluoride has now been
added to the water. There had been no vote, and there had not even been
any discussion. Communities coast-to-coast know that this is not at all
uncommon. Four glasses of fluoridated tap water contain about as much
fluoride as a prescription dose does. Not only is fluoridated water
nonprescription, it is even more certain to be swallowed than
toothpaste. Being over 6 years of age means better control over
swallowing reflexes, thus limiting ingestion of fluoride from
toothpaste. There is no such accommodation for drinking water.

Evidence-based medicine requires
evidence before medicating. Fluoridation of water is not evidence-based.
It has not been tested in well-controlled studies. Fluoridation of
public water is a default medication, since you have to deliberately
avoid it if you do not want to take it. A person's daily intake of
fluoride simply from drinking an average quantity of fluoridated tap
water, fluoridated bottled water, and beverages produced or prepared
with fluoridated water can easily exceed the threshold for what your
druggist would rightly demand a prescription for. Fluoride in toothpaste
and mouth rinses also is medication. It may be intended as topical, but
the reality is different. No matter how it may be applied in their
mouths, young children are going to swallow it. Indeed, most of the
public and the dental profession already have.

Comment by Albert W. Burgstahler, PhD: Support for these views and conclusions is found in a recent review in Critical Public Health
(2011:1-19) titled "Slaying sacred cows: is it time to pull the plug on
water fluoridation?" by Stephen Peckham of the Department of Health
Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine. In his article, Peckham concludes that evidence for the
effectiveness and safety of water fluoridation is seriously defective
and not in agreement with findings of a growing body of current and
previously overlooked research. For an abstract of this report, scroll
down at: http://www.fluorideresearch.org/444/files/FJ2011_v44_n4_p260-261_sfs.pdf

This revised article
originally appeared in Fluoride 2011, 44(4)188-190. It is reprinted with
kind permission of the International Society for Fluoride Research Inc.
www.fluorideresearch.org or www.fluorideresearch.com. Editorial Office: 727 Brighton Road, Ocean View, Dunedin 9035, New Zealand.

Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D. (USA), Editor of the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine and contact person. Email: omns@orthomolecular.org
Readers may write in with their comments and questions for
consideration for publication and as topic suggestions. However, OMNS is
unable to respond to individual emails.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Sixty-eight years ago, on January 25, sodium fluoride was
slowly poured into Grand Rapids, Michigan’s public water supply to prove that
fluoridation reduces children’s tooth decay. Five years into the experiment,
things weren’t going as expected. Cavities declined equally in the
non-fluoridated control city of Muskegon, too. So to blur the truth or prove
their expectation, Muskegon was fluoridated also.

So what’s happening today?

Grand Rapids children are showing high rates of tooth decay
and dental fluorosis. According to the Grand Rapids Press, one pediatric
dentist said in 2007 “…we see children under the age of 2 with active
decay…Rather than just a few cavities, we're seeing a lot of cavities. It's not
unusual to see a child with 8 to 10 cavities."

America’s children are fluoride-overdosed with almost half of all
adolescents afflicted with dental
fluorosis, white spotted, yellow, brown and/or pitted teeth. Tooth decay has increased in toddlers, untreated
tooth decay is epidemic, more dental schools are opening and more dental professionals
have been created. Emergency rooms are
flooded with patients in dental pain because 80% of dentists refuse to treat
Medicaid patients and half of all Americans don’t have dental insurance. Those that have insurance can’t afford the
out-of-pocket expenses. And Americans
have died from the consequences of untreated tooth decay.

The US Department of Health and Human
Services and the Centers for
Disease Control and many other dental,
health and government agencies now recommend that infant formula NOT be
mixed with fluoridated water to avoid dental fluorosis. References:
http://www.FormulaFluoride.Webs.com.

The prestigious US National Research Council produced a fluoride
report which reveals that fluoride, even at the low doses added to water
supplies can be detrimental to the thyroid gland, kidney patients, people who
drink high volumes of water and babies. But it’s being ignored

. In 1990, the New York State
Department ofHealth (DoH) published a study, “Fluoride: Benefits and
Risks ofExposure,” alerting officials that fluoride can be
harmful to kidneypatients, diabetics and those with fluoride
hypersensitivity even at“optimal” levels. But the advice went unheeded,
research leftundone and today’s claims of safety ring hollow.

Kaminsky et. al report: "The available data
suggest that someindividuals may experience hypersensitivity to
fluoride-containingagents” and " …individuals with renal
insufficiency who consume largequantities of fluoridated water are at an
increased risk of developingskeletal fluorosis.” Research in these two
areas were advised butnever conducted.

Further, dental fluorosis was reported in
diabetics who consume largevolumes of water containing 0.5 to 1.0 mg
fluoride/liter, the latterequal to NYS’s fluoridated water supplies.

Malfunctioning kidneys may not adequately filter
fluoride from theblood allowing toxic fluoride levels to build up
in and damage bones.Symptoms of skeletal fluorosis include bone pain,
tenderness andfractures, according to the EPA.

The American Dental Association admits in its
Fluoridation Factsbooklet "decreased fluoride removal may occur
among persons withseverely impaired kidney function who may not be
on kidney dialysis."

The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) withdrew its
fluoridationendorsement in 2007, with advice that “individuals
with CKD [ChronicKidney Disease] should be notified of the
potential risk of fluorideexposure.”

The landmark 2006 National Research Council
fluoride report stated,“Early water fluoridation studies did not
carefully assess changes inrenal [kidney] function...Several investigators
have shown thatpatients with impaired renal function, or on
hemodialysis, tend toaccumulate fluoride much more quickly than
normal."

Bone changes in advanced kidney patients are
similar to bone changesfound in individuals with skeletal fluorosis,
according to theFluoride Action Network. This raises the
possibility that someindividuals with kidney disease are suffering from
undiagnosedskeletal fluorosis.

Seven New York City Council Members are sponsoring
legislation to stopfluoridation in New York City NYC residents can
lighten theirtoxic fluoride exposure by contacting Mayor Michael
Bloomberg, SpeakerChristine Quinn and their own Council Member to
make sure they vote tostop the addition of fluoride chemicals into NYC’s
water supply

Many more citizens and legislators are not buying into the false fluoridation information and ending this outdated,ineffective, health-robbing, money-wasting concept. Many communities have stopped fluoridation and many more are considering despite the false information presented by the dental lobby.

We urge you to join them and demand that water fluoridation stop where you live. Educate your neighbors and then your legislators. Informed people do not want fluoride in their water.